TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT – misconduct – s.394, 400, 604 Fair Work Act 2009 – permission to appeal – Full Bench – appeal of unfair dismissal application in respect of the decision and amount of compensation awarded – at first instance Deputy President held that the applicant was unfairly dismissed and ordered an amount of compensation in lieu of reinstatement – Croker submitted permission to appeal should be granted as it raised important issues of general application and because the decision is not in the public’s best interests – several grounds were relied on by the appellant, including that the Deputy President did not exercise ‘proper discretion’ – onus was on Croker to establish a valid reason for the dismissal related to Mr Jarvis’ capacity or conduct – at first instance it was submitted by Croker that Mr Jarvis misrepresented himself in attempts to obtain sensitive information in a ‘corrupt and deceptive manner’ – Full Bench held that the Deputy President’s findings made it clear that Croker did not make out its case in relation to this alleged motivation for conduct – while the Deputy President found that Mr Jarvis misrepresented himself as a supervisor, on the evidence before them they were not satisfied this was done with any malicious or corrupt intent – Croker did not direct the Full Bench to any specific errors made by the Deputy President – Full Bench not satisfied of any error and considered the findings of the Deputy President to be open to her on the evidence – not satisfied it was in the public interest to grant permission to appeal – permission to appeal refused. Appeal by Croker Constructions against decision of Gooley DP of 19 April 2016 [[2016] FWC 2377] Re: Jarvis
…
